Retailers and others face problems when a product becomes dated or non-saleable. That is, goods that a particular retailer cannot sell in a time frame that is deemed reasonable become a liability to that retailer, and tie up resources (e.g., money, display space) that could be better used for other product. To overcome this problem, retailers will attempt to return such dated goods to the vendor from which they purchased the goods, or will place the goods on sale.
In certain industries, such as the jewelry business, vendors have begun requiring retailers who desire to return product previously purchased from the vendor, to purchase other product from the vendor. For example, if a retailer desired to return a particular line of product that did not sell well for the retailer, such as a line of rings by a particular designer, the vendor would require the retailer to purchase another line of product in order for the vendor to accept the returned product line and refund the money to the retailer on that line. In fact, some vendors will require the retailer to spend more on the other product than the amount being returned. For instance, the vendor may require the retailer to spend $5 on other product for every $1 of returned product.
Such arrangements are tolerable to the retailer if the retailer has an ongoing relationship with the vendor and the retailer was going to re-order new product in any event. However, the conditions imposed on the retailer by the vendor become problematic if the retailer does not want other product from the vendor, or is not in a financial condition to spend $5 for every $1 returned.
If the retailer cannot return the product to the vendor, the retailer is forced to “mark down” the goods until they become saleable. If the retailer is still unable to sell the marked down products, the retailer must take the loss.
Vendors generally dislike taking back returned product (even at the advantageous conditions typically imposed). However, the vendor can often resell the returned merchandise to another retailer that can more readily sell such product to the consumer. The second retailer's ability to sell such product may be a result of the second retailers location, type of business or other similar factors.
The present invention is provided to solve the problems discussed above and other problems, and to provide advantages and aspects not provided by prior practices for resolving problems of this type. A full discussion of the features and advantages of the present invention is deferred to the following detailed description, which proceeds with reference to the accompanying drawings.